steve82
Well-Known Member
Might as well close thread unless West Ham fancy smashing their transfer record should Arnautovic get his move.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Hooray! Back on topic.
It’s also easy to put people off or “bullshit them” when they are just crying out to blame all things evil and bad in the world on a pantomime protagonist.Which is why I suggested to Fans groups to at least try and put a Q and A out with facts to clear them up.
Just found this on the telegraph in an article too:
The fans are confused basically because people are purposely trying to mislead them about things like that to get them to boycott / get angry / protest.
It's what pisses me off. People purposely bullshit to try and put others off going to watch their team play. People then repeat it as fact to their mate who then also get wound up and rant.
I am on board with that. It is a sensible model, albeit one that would be much more beneficial if we owned our own ground. Don't know the accounts as well as I might, but it is the 'admin charges/interest' that I fear hamstring us.I’ve been a multi corporate member at coventry for about 15 years , I also had some small sponsorship on pitch side advertising for ... so I know some of the people up there quite well now and do get to hear what’s happening. Not pretending to know any more or less than some of the others on here , but this is how it is
The sale of players pretty much goes to cover previous year losses and current ‘ the club needs to be self sufficent” costs. I was amazed when we spent the money we did this season on players like Chaplin and bakayako & offered the wages we did to get players like ogogo, and junior brown etc.
Don’t get me wrong I want SISU gone as next as the next man, but we all know that ticket sales is pretty much all we have to drive regular revenue & roughly how many people we need to cover costs - and how many we actually get up there ! So They could have quite easily said , you make do with academy or cheapos ( which clearly wasn’t the case, regardless of how those signings turned out )
So ‘put up With them’ or despise them you need to accept that we lose money and player sales is what plugs the gap & anything we get to spend from those sales is a bonus with SISU in charge
Are you "Radford leather fashions" by any chance?:woot:I’ve been a multi corporate member at coventry for about 15 years , I also had some small sponsorship on pitch side advertising for ... so I know some of the people up there quite well now and do get to hear what’s happening. Not pretending to know any more or less than some of the others on here , but this is how it is
The sale of players pretty much goes to cover previous year losses and current ‘ the club needs to be self sufficent” costs. I was amazed when we spent the money we did this season on players like Chaplin and bakayako & offered the wages we did to get players like ogogo, and junior brown etc.
Don’t get me wrong I want SISU gone as next as the next man, but we all know that ticket sales is pretty much all we have to drive regular revenue & roughly how many people we need to cover costs - and how many we actually get up there ! So They could have quite easily said , you make do with academy or cheapos ( which clearly wasn’t the case, regardless of how those signings turned out )
So ‘put up With them’ or despise them you need to accept that we lose money and player sales is what plugs the gap & anything we get to spend from those sales is a bonus with SISU in charge
The interest isn't really being paid. Just totted up.I am on board with that. It is a sensible model, albeit one that would be much more beneficial if we owned our own ground. Don't know the accounts as well as I might, but it is the 'admin charges/interest' that I fear hamstring us.
That will change every year and have loads of variables, do you want the club to come out and say how much the club needs to make from players going every year?
The last published accounts player sales were way down compared to the year before. Obviously since then we sold McNulty so will see in the next set released if it has gone up.
SISU have still been putting smaller loans in as well.
Because it's different every year, we get a promotion and a day at Wembley and we need less from player sales. We have a good cup run and we generate more.Yes I do if they want fans to stop worrying. Whether they want that is their call.
My point is you don’t know, I don’t know. So to come out and say you do know and anyone asking is a moron is a little silly.
We have been told everything from we need millions a year, to Maddison sale secured us, to we are self sufficient. Is it really that crazy that people are confused?
The classic catch 22, people won't go if the team isn't great, and it can't be great if people won't go.I’ve been a multi corporate member at coventry for about 15 years , I also had some small sponsorship on pitch side advertising for ... so I know some of the people up there quite well now and do get to hear what’s happening. Not pretending to know any more or less than some of the others on here , but this is how it is
The sale of players pretty much goes to cover previous year losses and current ‘ the club needs to be self sufficent” costs. I was amazed when we spent the money we did this season on players like Chaplin and bakayako & offered the wages we did to get players like ogogo, and junior brown etc.
Don’t get me wrong I want SISU gone as next as the next man, but we all know that ticket sales is pretty much all we have to drive regular revenue & roughly how many people we need to cover costs - and how many we actually get up there ! So They could have quite easily said , you make do with academy or cheapos ( which clearly wasn’t the case, regardless of how those signings turned out )
So ‘put up With them’ or despise them you need to accept that we lose money and player sales is what plugs the gap & anything we get to spend from those sales is a bonus with SISU in charge
I’ve been a multi corporate member at coventry for about 15 years , I also had some small sponsorship on pitch side advertising for ... so I know some of the people up there quite well now and do get to hear what’s happening. Not pretending to know any more or less than some of the others on here , but this is how it is
The sale of players pretty much goes to cover previous year losses and current ‘ the club needs to be self sufficent” costs. I was amazed when we spent the money we did this season on players like Chaplin and bakayako & offered the wages we did to get players like ogogo, and junior brown etc.
Don’t get me wrong I want SISU gone as next as the next man, but we all know that ticket sales is pretty much all we have to drive regular revenue & roughly how many people we need to cover costs - and how many we actually get up there ! So They could have quite easily said , you make do with academy or cheapos ( which clearly wasn’t the case, regardless of how those signings turned out )
So ‘put up With them’ or despise them you need to accept that we lose money and player sales is what plugs the gap & anything we get to spend from those sales is a bonus with SISU in charge
Cheers, you've confirmed something I asked in earlier thread about how transfer fees are accountedI largely agree the last sentence, there is little we can expect with SISU in charge other than keeping going (but even then there is a current doubt on that!)
However some of what you are being told is misleading.
Sale of players forms part of the current years results. We make annual net losses so none of the player sales can be said to offset previous years losses. Indeed total losses continue to increase year on year, its a long time since CCFC made a net profit.
The player transactions & wages this year would have benefited from the sale of McNulty and the Maddison add ons .
Before someone says it no the interest isn't paid but that's cash flow not profit calculation. For profit calculation it is a full cost. Similarly the player sales might not be received in one payment again that's cash flow not profit calculation. For profit calculation the full sale value is included (add ons based on what ifs would not be until the year received)
Nor could it be said that the player sales cover previous years cash flow (which in any case are at break even generally so dont need much in the way of covering) Cash flow covers what is and what will be going forward
In the absence of any other support from the owners then substantial player sales are important to keep the club going. Which is why it is disappointing that so many of the players brought in this season have proven to be under performing. It means more sales will need to happen, unless there is a Callum Wilson windfall
No we do not all know that ticket income is our only regular income driver. That is quite wrong. This is a fiction first propagated by Fisher. There is a previous thread that i created detailing why but for simplicity i will let the clubs own accounts signed by Fisher rebutt that fiction
View attachment 11342
only 40% of income is from match day receipts. Turnover compares reasonably well with other clubs eg Walsall, Fleetwood, etc
I am on board with that. It is a sensible model, albeit one that would be much more beneficial if we owned our own ground. Don't know the accounts as well as I might, but it is the 'admin charges/interest' that I fear hamstring us.
NEWS: Coventry City FC and parent company publish latest set of accounts
Here's an example of a basic breakdown.
Then you have a reply:
How simple do people want it to be?
It's the same as when SISU's accounts were published and people went apeshit not realising they weren't the clubs.
Unless people are willing to at least try and understand, there's not much point.
All clubs have administration costs. in the case of CCFC in the last accounts they total £1.568m and partially disclosed as follows
View attachment 11343
To those figures you have to add in things like all the costs of Insurance, repairs, Academy costs, running Ryton, grounds keeping, rates, etc
Having taken a look at other clubs then the figures are reasonably similar. All clubs will have these costs
Interest is an amount demanded on the ARVO and SISU International loans. It is not actually paid over so doesnt affect cash flow. However it is a full charge against the profit & loss Account each year, it is an amount legally due to the lender. The amount of interest not paid is added to what is owed to those two parties. In 2017 CCFC were making losses even before the cost of these loans
How if we get fair size gates and pay little for renting the ground are we not a force regards players then if sisu are not short changing us? Is it the managers and recruitment teams at fault?
Eddie Howe has ruled out Wilson going in this window.
He has to say that really unless Wilson put in a transfer request otherwise fans would see it as Wilson being put in the shop window. It also makes it clear that any offer has to be enough to make it worthwhile selling him.Eddie Howe has ruled out Wilson going in this window.
I don't think any fan ever got in to their team by virtue of a balance sheet or the financials performance of the holding company.All clubs have administration costs. in the case of CCFC in the last accounts they total £1.568m and partially disclosed as follows
View attachment 11343
To those figures you have to add in things like all the costs of Insurance, repairs, Academy costs, running Ryton, grounds keeping, rates, etc
Having taken a look at other clubs then the figures are reasonably similar. All clubs will have these sort of costs
Interest is an amount demanded on the ARVO and SISU International loans. It is not actually paid over so doesnt affect cash flow. However it is a full charge against the profit & loss Account each year, it is an amount legally due to the lender. The amount of interest not paid is added to what is owed to those two parties. In 2017 CCFC were making losses even before the cost of these loans
FFS, m8 stop with this rational thought process, please....I’ve been a multi corporate member at coventry for about 15 years , I also had some small sponsorship on pitch side advertising for ... so I know some of the people up there quite well now and do get to hear what’s happening. Not pretending to know any more or less than some of the others on here , but this is how it is
The sale of players pretty much goes to cover previous year losses and current ‘ the club needs to be self sufficent” costs. I was amazed when we spent the money we did this season on players like Chaplin and bakayako & offered the wages we did to get players like ogogo, and junior brown etc.
Don’t get me wrong I want SISU gone as next as the next man, but we all know that ticket sales is pretty much all we have to drive regular revenue & roughly how many people we need to cover costs - and how many we actually get up there ! So They could have quite easily said , you make do with academy or cheapos ( which clearly wasn’t the case, regardless of how those signings turned out )
So ‘put up With them’ or despise them you need to accept that we lose money and player sales is what plugs the gap & anything we get to spend from those sales is a bonus with SISU in charge
The interest isn't really being paid. Just totted up.
No it isn't, but it still has to be accounted for and the club has to make allowances to show it can service that debt and interest should it actually be called in, even if everyone expects it to be deferred. So it does hamstring to a small degree.
Most businesses working on credit are quite happy, and often prefer, to defer payment for a while as long as they have the cashflow without it so they can compound it. It's how credit card and loan companies make the majority of their earnings and the premise of most pensions and investments - it's the amount of time it's kept in rather than the rate of return so it has time to accrue.
If the club were to be sold you can guarantee the owners would want all that compound interest paid, and at that point they will have made a pretty penny from it.
Biggest cost the club has is staff costs ..............
That's a good point, but how big are our staff overheads outside the squad, minimal ticket staff . And shop is outsourced and is it compounded by the size of the management fees... Would love to know what Fisher actually does to deserve renumeration for
They wouldn't be able to call it in as there's nothing really to call in. Aren't they ongoing based on SISU saying they won't call anything in?
Yeah, as part of the going concern there will be a conversation between auditors and owners as to whether they intend to call in a debt/interest and they'll probably say no, but it's not legally binding. Just a sort of gentleman's agreement (needs a new name in the modern day that really).
I had to look up how much interest is owed from the accounts and got this.
Interest payable within the year from within the accounting period £1.8m
Accrued interest on related party loans due within one year £5.6m
Related party loans due within one year £8.6m
Total - £14.2m - secured by debenture by ARVO
That's quite a bit for a business with turnover of £6.1m and 300k in the bank
Other quick things of note were that the club had only 11 administrative and commercial staff on average during the period, and that £75k was paid to third parties for directors services (during the period in question Timmy and Venus for about 7 months) so it would appear Timmy saying he doesn't get paid is the usual half-truth you can expect from him. What he means is he personally isn't paid directly by the club.
No it isn't, but it still has to be accounted for and the club has to make allowances to show it can service that debt and interest should it actually be called in, even if everyone expects it to be deferred. So it does hamstring to a small degree.
Most businesses working on credit are quite happy, and often prefer, to defer payment for a while as long as they have the cashflow without it so they can compound it. It's how credit card and loan companies make the majority of their earnings and the premise of most pensions and investments - it's the amount of time it's kept in rather than the rate of return so it has time to accrue.
If the club were to be sold you can guarantee the owners would want all that compound interest paid, and at that point they will have made a pretty penny from it.
anyone buying Otium Entertainment Group Ltd would want their head looking at. No one would take the debt on. A purchaser i would recommend to buy the assets and take on the football related creditors (a requirement by FA & EFL). Leave the liabilities loans and baggage behind. Wouldnt affect CCFC new co or the new owners how the sale proceeds were distributed.
The reason they can take on debt past the value of the assets is because it is not commercial lending the sense of a bank. I would guess that the interest is charged in order to deter any interest from 3rd parties whilst the court actions etc are going on. It also guarantees who controls Otium in an insolvency. So its not really normal lending. So long as the owners say to themselves the lenders that its ok then the serviciability isnt really a problem so long as the other creditors are paid as they fall due.
Not sure you can assume Fisher got any part of the directors fees to 3rd parties it could have been a company owned by Venus - so was he being misleading about that ? we dont know for sure he could have but he might not
With the huge interest charges over the club ARVO effectively owns all assets thrice over if not more!Operating leases would include the rent for Ricoh but also the Higgs plus any other sites they might use. Some associated costs may well be included
Ryton is owned by Otium but ARVO has a charge over it and all other assets
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?